Legislature Acts To Save Schiavo

The St. Petersburg Times ^ | Oct 21, 2003 | ALLISON NORTH JONES and ELAINE SILVESTRINI

[amdgmary]

Oct 22, 2003

Legislature Acts To Save Schiavo

By ALLISON NORTH JONES and ELAINE SILVESTRINI

The Tampa Tribune

Pinellas Park police officers guard the entrance to the Woodside Hospice Monday, Oct. 20, 2003 in Pinellas Park, Fla., near a round-the-clock vigil outside the facility where Terri Schiavo is cared for.

TALLAHASSEE - The battle to save Terri Schiavo has shifted to the state Capitol, where legislative leaders agreed Monday after intense, daylong negotiations to grant Gov. Jeb Bush the power to intervene in the emotionally charged case.

The Florida House of Representatives passed a bill 68-23 last night that would give Bush the authority to order the comatose Schiavo's feeding tube replaced, reversing a judicial order that other judges have upheld. Twenty-eight lawmakers did not vote.

The state Senate is expected to pass the same measure today and send it to Bush, who likely will sign the bill immediately.

``The proposed bill would allow for a stay in cases of withholding nutrition and hydration from patients in situations similar to that of Ms. Schiavo,'' Bush said in a statement.

Once the bill is signed, Bush will have 15 days to issue a one-time stay.

The move came just hours after an advocacy group for disabled people pleaded with a federal judge in Tampa to keep Schiavo, 39, alive long enough to investigate a claim that she is being abused by her husband. U.S. District Judge Steven D. Merryday said he will issue a decision in the nationally watched case soon.

Phones and computers across the state Capitol rang and chimed throughout the day as lawmakers were flooded with pleas to intervene in the Schiavo case. Earlier in the day, House Speaker Johnnie Byrd, a Plant City Republican running for the U.S. Senate, opened the possibility of legislative intervention by confirming that he planned to propose legislation to ``save'' Schiavo. Rep. John Stargel, R-Lakeland, sponsored the bill.

``The family is elated,'' said Randall Terry, a spokesman for Terri Schiavo's parents who are trying to keep their daughter alive. ``They recognize there are still hurdles to overcome. They're praying Terri's health holds out until the governor can intervene to save her.''

Urging caution is Senate President Jim King, R-Jacksonville.

King said he is leery of interfering in a case that has been vetted in nearly ``every court in the land.'' But citing ``unique and unusual circumstances,'' he signed off on what he considers a narrowly drafted measure that still delivers what Byrd and Bush want.

``If we are going to err, then let us err on the side of caution,'' King said. ``I just hope to God we've done the right thing.''

The bill gives Bush the power to issue a ``one-time'' stay under certain conditions.

All are designed to fit Schiavo's case. Among them, for example, is a requirement that the feeding tube must have been removed as of Oct. 15 - the day Schiavo's tube was removed. Others stipulate that the patient have no written advance directive or living will, and that a family member is actively challenging the judicial orders.

But the bill raised a variety of legal and constitutional concerns for lawmakers worried the Legislature was overstepping its bounds.

``This bill so oversteps our role, it not only sets a dangerous precedent, it turns democracy on its head,'' said Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach.

In Tampa, an Advocacy Center for Persons with Disabilities attorney told Judge Merryday that the private agency received a telephone complaint Friday alleging Schiavo was the victim of neglect and abuse. The center is designated by the state to receive federal funds under a number of laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Attorney Gordon B. Scott asked Merryday to order that Schiavo be given nutrition long enough for the agency to investigate the abuse complaint. Such a temporary order, Scott said, would be in force for 10 days, after which Scott would be required to report any findings to the court.

Merryday asked Scott whether the agency would be in court if Terri Schiavo had left written instructions expressing her desire not to be kept alive on life support. State courts have ruled in favor of Michael Schiavo's claim that his wife had verbally expressed those wishes.

Scott said that if there were a legally valid written statement from Terri Schiavo, he would not have filed the request for the restraining order.

At the Pinellas Park hospice where Terri Schiavo spent her fifth full day without food or water Monday, the Schindler family remained upbeat while awaiting word from Tampa and Tallahassee.

The family is praying that the Legislature acts quickly to force the hospice to resume feeding Terri Schiavo, said her sister, Suzanne Carr.

``She seems to be alert,'' said her brother, Bob Schindler Jr. ``But every day that goes by, we're getting into a crucial time for her. She's got an incredible will to live.''

Reporter David Sommer contributed to this report. Reporter Allison North Jones can be reached at (850) 222-8382. Reporter Elaine Silvestrini can be reached at (813) 259-7837.

[tgbluesky]

you wrote "In many states, if the person is unconscious or in a coma, advance medical directives are allowed and are followed, including those where a person is given medical power of attorney. In the absense of written advance medical directives, many states have a system for husband/wife/family to be medical proxy. "
I certainly agree with that, and the fact that I would not want any elected or appointed government official to take away those rights. What seems to be at odds in this particular case, is that the wishes of the husband (who seems to have a motive to dispose of his wife) are taken by the courts above the wishes of her birth family. I am not clear on the legal issues here, and would like to see a fair and humane policy put in place. The checks and balances of our system are all too often replaced or superseded by judges with their own interpretations of the law.

[antiRepublicrat]

That was an incredibly good post. Just when I thought I about had my mind made up about this case, you go and throw another monkey wrench into it.

[Sabatier]

The right to get rid of inconvenient relatives seems to outweigh all other rights...

[G.Mason]

"Just so everyone is aware, Jeb has been working vigorously on this issue. It is my understanding that he has been doing everything that he could to help Terri."

You're talking to a nearly empty room.

There are those that read, separate fact from fiction, and understand. Then there are those that follow rumor and inuendo, toss in some hysterics, get a rope and scream for a lynching.

[dsc]

``This bill so oversteps our role, it not only sets a dangerous precedent, it turns democracy on its head,'' said Rep. Dan Gelber, D-Miami Beach."

Horse hillary. Legislatures are supposed to make law, not courts.

[G.Mason]

"What seems to be at odds in this particular case, is that the wishes of the husband (who seems to have a motive to dispose of his wife) are taken by the courts above the wishes of her birth family. I am not clear on the legal issues here ....... "

Like it or not the husband and his wishes take precedence over Terri's mother and father.

That is what the legal issue is here.

[fqued]

There are cases where a person wounds another, the wounded person refuses treatment and dies, and the attacker is charged with murder, not assault, not attempted murder, but murder itself.

One case: guy stabs a woman who is a Jehovah's Witness. At the hospital she is told that if she has a blood transfusion she will live and be fine, if not she will die. She refuses, because of her religion. She dies. Guy is charged with murder.

Right to refuse medical treatment was the difference between life and death / murder and assault.

I LIKE this right, and any religious person or Jeffersonian Conservative should like this right, BUT Terri's case points out the need to tweak the system so that someone can step in where a travesty MIGHT occur, without trampling on the right itself.

[lewistopher]

You can email the senate president to try to convince him to pass this bill at kind.james.webb@flsenate.gov. Courtesy Glenn Beck.

[dsc]

"I don't understand how a judge can rule on a case where being able to actually physically see the evidence is important when said judge cannot see."

Are you kidding? This guy is blind?

Why hasn't that been an issue?

[lewistopher]

sorry, that was king.james.webb@flsenate.gov.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I know some people don't like Jeb and have angst built up for him being a Republican, a Bush, whatever, but he is a compassionate man and is doing everything possible.

I agree.

[lewistopher]

reminds me of a story of 27 8x10 color glossy pictures with circles and arrows an a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one was to be used as evidence against us. man walked in, said all rise; we all stood up, obie stood up with the 27 8x10 color glossy pictures, and the judge walked in with a seein' eye dog. and obie looked at the seeing eye dog, and then at the 27 8x10 color glossy pictures and then again at the seein eye dog. And then again at the 27 8x10 color glossy pictures with the circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explainin' what each one was to be used as evidence against us and began to cry, because obie had come tothe realization that it was a typical case of american blind justice and the judge wasn't gonna look at the 27 8x10 color glossy pictures, and there was nothin' he could do about it.

my dad just visited the church last week. the railroad tracks really aren't 1/2 mile away - more like 150 yards!

[Darnright]

>Ignoring this case for the moment, the system essentially enshrines that basic right to refuse medical treatment, even if it results in death.

However, there is something VERY wrong with a system that allows a person, who has a financial stake in another's death, to make the decision to refuse treatment on that helpless citizen's behalf.

[dsc]

Is it still a restaurant?

[Frankss]

Why can anyone decide for anyone else, to stop them from being fed, which is what they are doing. She is breathing on her own, heart beating ect. Starving her to death is most cruel. Why doesn't this guy just let the parents take care of her? Why does he want her to starve to death?

[dsc]

"However, there is something VERY wrong with a system that allows a person, who has a financial stake in another's death, to make the decision to refuse treatment on that helpless citizen's behalf."

Yer darn right.

[lewistopher]

he didn't go to the restaurant, he went to the church - remember, alice doesn't live in the restaurant, she lives in the bell tower with her husband ray and facha the dog, and seeing as they had all that space where the pews used to be, they decided they didn't have to take out their garbage for a long time.

[texaslil]

It's the money he'll inherit. Remainder of medical trust fund. Also I understand the judge allowed firing of the trustee of that fund. Could it just be because it was being used for other purposes? Also--parents believe hubby had something to do with her condition. hubbys rush to cremation when she's still alive raises red flags.

[antiRepublicrat]

I agree completely. It is the part about the right to make a decision devolves to a spouse in cases that makes me worry. If they can stop this guy from making decisions for his wife (whatever bad motives may be there), what could happen to my right to make decisions for my wife or children? It is scary that the legislature is doing an end-run around these rights.

That the apparently are drafting this very narrowly and carefully is somewhat consoling, but in doing that they are somewhat attempting a bill of attainder, which is unsettling. I believe that is what the man in the article was referring to with his misgivings.

The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators...
--- James Madison

[GrandMoM]

....Quite scary, but, interesting.

....I believe Mr. Black, but doubt the use Eugenics was limited to CT !!!!!!